conworldfandomcom-20200222-history
Talk:War of the North Atlantic
Three points: #I have ships sitting in international water that happens to be nearby an ally, and planes at an Air Force base in Africa. How does this threaten anyone in any way? #There is no state of war present between the East Asian Federation and any other country. #YOU have violated international law, because it is completely within a nation's rights to expel the diplomatic staff of another country. Your refusal grants permission to remove by force. See here. Stop being sensationalist. Woogers - talk ( ) 20:11, March 1, 2012 (UTC) :Persona non grata is not applicable if it is not explicitly part of the countries' agreement. I have always stated that ANY Allied States embassy is SOVEREIGN soil in all definitions of the word. You added yourself as a belligerent on the side of the Scandinavians thus ICly you have stated your support for the illegal Scandinavian war effort. Obviously I will quit trading with you if you keep siding with the side which is not on my side. -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: (talk • ) 20:17, March 1, 2012 (UTC) If the host country is party to the Vienna Convention, then it is part of the countries' agreement whether explicitly stated or not. And yes, embassies are sovereign soil. In another country. Sudan expelled Syria's ambassador to Sudan because it disagreed with the Syrian government. Is this grounds for war? No. And "siding" with a country in this case means parking ships in free water to stop right-wing nutjobs from invading Europe over nothing, not engaging in a illegal war. Woogers - talk ( ) 20:21, March 1, 2012 (UTC) Finally, we agree, it's not grounds for war. My MPs defended the embassy and then the Scandinavian police raided a diplomatic center and started shooting at my troops (who have been living WITH the Scandinavian troops for months, thus most of them are personal friends) on one of their own bases. Who overreacted here? -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: (talk • ) 20:27, March 1, 2012 (UTC) You. You don't kill civilians over protests. You arrest them. THAT'S WHAT POLICE DO. What do you think happens when a bunch of anarchists protest a World Bank meeting? D'ya think Metropolitan Police goes out and starts shooting at anything that moves? No. They put on riot gear and beat the crap out of protesters and then THROW THEM IN JAIL. They asked you to leave nicely. You refused. This is what happens. Woogers - talk ( ) 20:30, March 1, 2012 (UTC) You didn't read. They threw EXPLOSIVES at Allied States citizens. That's not a protest, it's an attack. An act of hostility. The troops fired at a group of people who threatened their lives and the lives of Americans. I initially hoped Scandinavia would respond with something along the lines of "a police investigation" but rather they sent police in to battle with a military ally. Better yet, a Security Council member, without being provoked. Other than that, the Scandinavians have no jurisdiction on sovereign AS soil thus I don't need to leave the embassy nor do I have to leave the base since I own half of it. I did what anyone would have done: defending the assets of my nation. -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: (talk • ) 20:35, March 1, 2012 (UTC) Molotov cocktails are standard fare at any serious protest. Obviously you don't watch enough coverage of G8 meetings. Take this as an example. Also, read this. Woogers - talk ( ) 20:40, March 1, 2012 (UTC) ::The Union of Everett uses lethal force against rioters. That specific video would be totally different in Future World. (Toronto 2010) Ham Ham Time (User/Talk/World/WAT) 22:19, March 1, 2012 (UTC) They are attacking a meeting on their own soil. The Scandinavians threw explosives from Scandinavia into the Allied States. At least I didn't declare war on Scandinavia for allowing its citizens to on behalf of their government invade a sovereign nation. My troops after feeling their lives threatened, fired rounds into the crowd, killing three. Besides, where is all of this coming from? The countries I am invading in the Middle East are all listed as enemies of Scandinavia. It's just as well the US would declare war on South Korea (an ally, like Scandinavia and the AS was) if they invade North Korea. All of this is just beyond me, I have no idea what all of this is based on. -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: (talk • ) 20:46, March 1, 2012 (UTC) "Also, read this." Woogers - talk ( ) 20:47, March 1, 2012 (UTC) I repeat myself, we don't follow normal etiquette, we follow the terms of our agreement, which, as I have always stated that embassies of the Allied States are sovereign soil. -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: (talk • ) 20:50, March 1, 2012 (UTC) I don't remember anyone agreeing to that. I know I didn't. Usually agreements are between two or more parties. Woogers - talk ( ) 20:51, March 1, 2012 (UTC) Well, if you don't want an Allied States embassy, say it on your foreign relations page. I assume all countries which want corn and other food from the great plains have an embassy and agree to my terms. If they don't, they have a foreign relations page. -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: (talk • ) 20:54, March 1, 2012 (UTC) If you will it. Woogers - talk ( ) 20:56, March 1, 2012 (UTC) I never was a military ally with anyone prior to the Eurozone attacks when Skandinavia opened its military to the OIS. Synthic 22:35, March 1, 2012 (UTC) :Every time you admitted to us having a Joint Base in Keflavik, you admitted to a military alliance. It comes with the package. -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: (talk • ) 22:45, March 1, 2012 (UTC) I never agreed to station any of my troops there. In fact I didn't even know it existed until I read up on some Baltic Union articles. If I knew it existed prior to this conflict, I would have eliminated the base OOCly. Synthic 22:55, March 1, 2012 (UTC) Reasons I feel very oblivious, but why exactly has Scandinavia declared war on the Allied States? —TimeMaster (talk • ) 01:07, March 2, 2012 (UTC) Skandinavisk Declaration of War Against the Allied States, 2012 Synthic 01:12, March 2, 2012 (UTC) Alright, that explains most of it. What do you think of a Soviet invasion of Germany to free all the Slavic states? —TimeMaster (talk • ) 01:18, March 2, 2012 (UTC) I wouldn't mind it, but with all these wars, it would be like WWIV Synthic 01:39, March 2, 2012 (UTC) >invade Germany >free, free peoples >ignore East Bulgaria Soviet Russia is best Russia. Ham Ham Time (User/Talk/World/WAT) 02:28, March 2, 2012 (UTC) Its already free, they are all represented in the German government. I'm kinda done with this i've been gone forever, ignore the problems and cause crap and leave. I'm almost done with FW, and I'm sure people woulden't mind for me leaving. I don't like the attiude TimeMaster brings back to Conworlds when hes done on Lovia, and diss's on peoples spelling, I'd be happy to do so if it wasent in such a rude way. I decided not to fully support a war against Skandinavia because hes got a nice crib up in there and had worked pretty hard on his nation. I'm also buds with the Allied States, and in NATO, i support my NATO friends and hope they'd support us in the future. I'm already at war with East Bulgaria, but I'm already planning on leaving- so Russia can do its thing and bully and take its regin as some type of puppet. -Sunkist- 03:06, March 2, 2012 (UTC) Not my fault you can't spell. I just asked nicely on your talk. What did you expect, lol? Also. . . I'm not done with Lovia. The people of Lorraine, Holstein, Prussian Poland, and all the other ethnic minorities were represented in the German government in the time of the first German Empire, but still overwhelmingly wanted to go back to their own country. Same thing with Kosovo today, you know. One more thing. . . why is the USSR in NATO. . ? Not really a problem, though, since the Soviets like the west now. UP, I don't know what you mean. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 03:17, March 2, 2012 (UTC) "Not my fault you can't spell" I mean, come on. Do you really need to say it like that. You did not ask nicely, I'm sorry but you incredibly rude. -Sunkist- 03:20, March 2, 2012 (UTC) "...hes got a nice crib up in there..." Er? Synthic 03:28, March 2, 2012 (UTC) I was making a joke, but I was saying, you have done a great job on your nation building. I wish I could dedicate more time to Conworlds. -Sunkist- 03:31, March 2, 2012 (UTC) Oh, you're making a joke about my 450 square meter home? That's nice :] Synthic 03:40, March 2, 2012 (UTC) If this were an actual role playing game, all of us would have been banned by this time for disgusting amounts of metagaming. -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: (talk • ) 09:10, March 2, 2012 (UTC) Then I guess this isn't an actual roleplaying game. :P —TimeMaster (talk • ) 12:09, March 2, 2012 (UTC) It isn't. Too much powergaming and metagaming. -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: (talk • ) 12:29, March 2, 2012 (UTC) It's hard to regulate a roleplaying game completely based on everyone's individual imaginations and because half of the countries are barely developed compared to the older players, (EAF, Everett, Yarphei, ASA). And TM, you want to invade Germany while totally ignoring THIS. Ham Ham Time (User/Talk/World/WAT) 17:41, March 2, 2012 (UTC) I know about that, but the dictator of East Bulgaria seems to be inactive and the war has gone inactive as well. That war should be removed from history. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 21:27, March 2, 2012 (UTC) :It's stunts like that which scare the living hell out of people who like stability. UP, when are we creating FW 2.0 or something where countries and history don't just get wiped off the face of the Earth every time someone goes inactive? -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: (talk • ) 21:54, March 2, 2012 (UTC) ::Because then we have a seriously messed up history that all the new people have no idea about. Is it time for FW 3.0? —TimeMaster (talk • ) 22:13, March 2, 2012 (UTC) :::You can't mess up history. If it happens(ed) then it happens(ed). We didn't revert history when Hitler killed 2 million Jews - we weren't and aren't able. We also shouldn't be able to do it in a game which is supposed to be based on realism role play. -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: (talk • ) 22:26, March 2, 2012 (UTC) ::::That's real life, which is completely different. And FW isn't realistic at all. Countries are constantly being removed and added. I suggest you look at the Circum-Asia War, which was a major part of FW, but removed in FW 2.0. That's why I'm proposing FW 3.0. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 22:28, March 2, 2012 (UTC) :::::Well I thought we were currently in 1.0 - We should go to 3.0 then but then countries which connect stay connected (regardless of their user's status) and if their owner is inactive, new players may take the land it occupies, however, history doesn't change. It adds some challenge to the game as well as stability which is needed. Players who feel they need unparalleled freedom to form their own history from scratch can play 2.0. -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: (talk • ) 22:32, March 2, 2012 (UTC) ::::::1.0 is gone, it's that Circum-Asia War stuff with Taiping that no longer exists. We're in 2.0 now, which de facto started in December 2009 when the EAF and Yarphei joined. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 22:46, March 2, 2012 (UTC) Eh, we did that during 1.0. We had multiple dimensions of Future World's existence because of alterations in history and overlapping nation claims and existences. I personally don't see the issue with just disconnecting abandoned crap. But all I can think of is to somehow enforce stricter game play rules to ensure a country and user will actually stick around for a long period of time. Ham Ham Time (User/Talk/World/WAT) 22:37, March 2, 2012 (UTC) :Because if we keep the history but disconnect the nations, many loose ends are made and the world makes no sense. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 22:39, March 2, 2012 (UTC) How can you not see the problem? The Baltic Union was a close ally of the Allied States, now, just months later, that territory is shooting up embassies. The Allied States wanted to invade Italy when it was controlled by some or other military junta but now the Allied States' biggest ally is located there (just months later). We need to stop disconnecting nations. The concept itself is bullshit. We can disconnect users. We need to see the line between IC and OOC. -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: (talk • ) 22:41, March 2, 2012 (UTC) :If we do that, the fun, mostly for new users, will be seriously reduced. It's things like those that make me want to be allowed to undo some history if it no longer makes any sense in the current timeline, ESPECIALLY if things were done retroactively. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 22:43, March 2, 2012 (UTC) :Then should we have an entirely re-boot the game. Of couse all the main entities would stay, ASA, UoE, Scandinavia, EA, Yarp. But I'd say some one else needs to take Russia, its never active and if so its only for a short while. -Sunkist- 22:46, March 2, 2012 (UTC) :If there is a reboot, we need to make is so that countries which have been connected, and things that have happened, can't be undone. -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: (talk • ) 22:47, March 2, 2012 (UTC) There needs to be only one timeline. We need to decide whether we want this to be a casual RP game or a serious RP game. If the caucus is the former, I'll have to take my leave. I cannot be expected to maintain over a hundred articles if we keep on disconnecting nations I have a relationship with. -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: (talk • ) 22:47, March 2, 2012 (UTC) :I would rather not have to deal with tons of inactive countries that don't do anything. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 22:49, March 2, 2012 (UTC) ::What's the problem with inactive countries? Once the user is disconnected, the country becomes a blank, thus, it is just like any other blank we have. It's not like they will be a problem. -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: (talk • ) 22:51, March 2, 2012 (UTC) :::That works, but prevents new people from claiming the land that they want. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 22:58, March 2, 2012 (UTC) :::It doesn't. They can claim the land of an inactive user - they just can't wipe the history. This means that if I go inactive, and someone wants to make a country where the ASA is (a blank), they need to incorporate the history I had for the ASA to his new country, like an independence war or something. It adds some challenge. But then again, serious RP or casual RP? -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: (talk • ) 23:00, March 2, 2012 (UTC) :But that prevents people from making a history from the 1950s on. It's unrealistic to have tons of nations suddenly merge/appear in the late 2000s and early 2010s. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 23:32, March 2, 2012 (UTC) :It's more unrealistic to have countries which existed just disappear from the face of the Earth. -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: (talk • ) 08:46, March 3, 2012 (UTC) ::Exactly, that's why we need to change history when they disappear. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 12:49, March 3, 2012 (UTC) ::No, that's why we shouldn't disconnect countries. Anyways, we should create a separate Future World for people like me who want stability. The rest can go on with 2.0 or whatever. -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: (talk • ) 15:29, March 3, 2012 (UTC) ::Then it becomes a problem when countries are disconnected cause eveyone has to change their historyand their pages. If we have un-disconnectable countries, it would mean less meaningless work for everyone. HORTON11: • 16:07, March 3, 2012 (UTC) :::Again... But that prevents people from making a history from the 1950s on. It's unrealistic to have tons of nations suddenly merge/appear in the late 2000s and early 2010s. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 17:30, March 3, 2012 (UTC) ::::That's what the premise of the whole game is. The rise of a new world order amid collapsing society in the 21st century. I agree with Horton and Super Warmonkey. Its too much work to keep having to change things because countries don't exist anymore. Woogers - talk ( ) 17:34, March 3, 2012 (UTC) :::Eh.. based on user demands, we will go with Super Warmonkey's idea. Ham Ham Time (User/Talk/World/WAT) 17:48, March 3, 2012 (UTC) @TM- My whole history is based on the premise of having hostile neighbors, which forms the reason for my weapons buildup. If Bulgaria were to be disconnected, my whole history wou;d have to be changed and I would not like that. HORTON11: • 18:32, March 3, 2012 (UTC) :UP has changed his history several times over. We shouldn't be reducing the fun for new users just for our own convenience... Besides, if people make idiotic countries like Bulgaria, Nuovo Impero Romano or others, they can be removed. Also, realistic countries would be retained, because they don't make the game chaotic. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 00:20, March 4, 2012 (UTC) ::Also, Bulgaria was connected long after Europa's first history was written... wasn't it a pain to add in all that stuff? It's much easier to remove than create. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 12:51, March 4, 2012 (UTC) Relevance The beauty of this long discussion amazes me. Synthic 22:40, March 2, 2012 (UTC) Herping Derping 2.0 I have a laptop, this cafe has internet. I've got 33 minutes. WHAT IS GOING ON? I Seriously hope we can erase this war in 2.0, as Keflavik would have never been a joint base if I knew of it in the first place. Synthic 21:29, March 3, 2012 (UTC) We are restarting Future World. But this time, all connected countries can't be disconnected EVER unless someone else wants that territory, but their things need to correspond with history that already exists. Thus, Future World will be much more stable now. I am however keeping my territorial claims of Canada and Baja California. -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: (talk • ) 15:13, March 4, 2012 (UTC) Plese don't delete my nation, I only did the warmonging for fun and I will remove the Emperor Bomb too. MMunson 03:56, March 6, 2012 (UTC) :That sounds alright. Though, it should be relaxed. If some new person makes a horrible or unrealistic country and then goes inactive, it should be able to be removed. Also, I wouldn't have a problem with removing East Bulgaria. . . —TimeMaster (talk • ) 15:26, March 4, 2012 (UTC) ::I kinda like Bulgaria, it adds something to fw. But we should just remove the crazier aspects, like that giant bomb. HORTON11: • 15:32, March 4, 2012 (UTC) We can disconnect countries which haven't interacted with others, like SOSCK or whatever and that Spanish thing. East Bulgaria however did more than interact, and should be kept regardless of how they warmonger. -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: (talk • ) 16:06, March 4, 2012 (UTC) 3.0 Made my day. Kunarian 23:09, March 7, 2012 (UTC) >>>/b/Woogers - talk ( ) 23:31, March 7, 2012 (UTC) I iz here: Not sure what to think Ham Ham Time (User/Talk/World/WAT) 23:33, March 7, 2012 (UTC)